Feasibility and validity of accelerometer measurements to assess physical activity in toddlers

International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity

Greet Cardon²  Ilse De Bourdeaudhuij²  Jessica Gubbels¹  Eveline Van Cauwenberghe² 

[1] Department of Health Promotion, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, PO Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands;Department of Movement and Sport Sciences, University of Ghent, Watersportlaan 2, 9000 Ghent, Belgium

关键词: Toddlers;    Accelerometer cut points;    Predictive validity;    Criterion validity;    Feasibility;    Observational System for Recording Physical Activity in Children-Preschool (OSRAC-P);    ActiGraph;   

Others  :  1153907
DOI  :  10.1186/1479-5868-8-67

 received in 2011-03-23, accepted in 2011-06-26,  发布年份 2011

【 摘 要 】

Background

Accelerometers are considered to be the most promising tool for measuring physical activity (PA) in free-living young children. So far, no studies have examined the feasibility and validity of accelerometer measurements in children under 3 years of age. Therefore, the purpose of the present study was to examine the feasibility and validity of accelerometer measurements in toddlers (1- to 3-year olds).

Methods

Forty-seven toddlers (25 boys; 20 ± 4 months) wore a GT1M ActiGraph accelerometer for 6 consecutive days and parental perceptions of the acceptability of wearing the monitor were assessed to examine feasibility. To investigate the validity of the ActiGraph and the predictive validity of three ActiGraph cut points, accelerometer measurements of 31 toddlers (17 boys; 20 ± 4 months) during free play at child care were compared to directly observed PA, using the Observational System for Recording Physical Activity in Children-Preschool (OSRAC-P). Validity was assessed using Pearson and Spearman correlations and predictive validity using area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic curve (ROC-AUC).

Results

The feasibility examination indicated that accelerometer measurements of 30 toddlers (63.8%) could be included with a mean registration time of 564 ± 62 min during weekdays and 595 ± 83 min during weekend days. According to the parental reports, 83% perceived wearing the accelerometer as 'not unpleasant and not pleasant' and none as 'unpleasant'. The validity evaluation showed that mean ActiGraph activity counts were significantly and positively associated with mean OSRAC-P activity intensity (r = 0.66; p < 0.001; n = 31). Further, the correlation among the ActiGraph activity counts and the OSRAC-P activity intensity level during each observation interval was significantly positive (ρ = 0.52; p < 0.001; n = 4218). Finally, the three sedentary cut points exhibited poor to fair classification accuracy (ROC-AUC: 0.56 to 0.71) while the three light PA (ROC-AUC: 0.51 to 0.62) and the three moderate-to-vigorous PA cut points (ROC-AUC: 0.53 to 0.57) demonstrated poor classification accuracy with respect to detecting sedentary behavior, light PA and moderate-to-vigorous PA, respectively.

Conclusions

The present findings suggest that ActiGraph accelerometer measurements are feasible and valid for quantifying PA in toddlers. However, further research is needed to accurately identify PA intensities in toddlers using accelerometry.

【 授权许可】

   
2011 Van Cauwenberghe et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Janz KF, Burns TL, Levy SM: Tracking of activity and sedentary behaviors in childhood: the Iowa Bone Development Study. Am J Prev Med 2005, 29:171-178.
• [2]Herman K, Craig C, Gauvin L, Katzmarzyk P: Tracking of obesity and physical activity from childhood to adulthood: the Physical Activity Longitudinal Study. Int J Pediatr Obes 2009, 4:281-288.
• [3]Timmons BW, Naylor PJ, Pfeiffer KA: Physical activity for preschool children - how much and how? Can J Public Health 2007, 98:S122-S134.
• [4]Janz KF, Kwon S, Letuchy EM, Eichenberger Gilmore JM, Burns TL, Torner JC, Willing MC, Levy SM: Sustained Effect of Early Physical Activity on Body Fat Mass in Older Children. Am J Prev Med 2009, 37:35-40.
• [5]Department of Health and Ageing (DOHA): Get up and grow: Healthy eating and physical activity for early childhood. [http:/ / www.health.gov.au/ internet/ main/ publishing.nsf/ content/ EDFEDB588460BCE3CA25762B00232A13/ $File/ gug-directorscoord-2.pdf] webcite [English]
• [6]Clark J, Clements R, Guddemi M, Morgan D, Pica R, Pivarnik J, Rudisill M, Small E, Virgilio S: Active Start: A Statement of Physical Activity Guidelines for Children From Birth to Age 5. Sewickley: National Association for Sport and Physical Education; 2009.
• [7]Oliver M: Physical activity in preschoolers: understanding prevalence and measurement issues. Sports Med 2007, 37:1045-1070.
• [8]Pate RR, O'Neill JR, Mitchel J: Measurement of Physical Activity in Preschool Children. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2010, 42:508-512.
• [9]Reilly JJ, Penpraze V, Hislop J, Davies G, Grant S, Paton JY: Objective measurement of physical activity and sedentary behaviour: review with new data. Arch Dis Child 2008, 93:614-619.
• [10]Cliff DP, Reilly JJ, Okely AD: Methodological considerations in using accelerometers to assess habitual physical activity in children aged 0-5 years. J Sci Med Sport 2009, 12:557-567.
• [11]de Vries SI, Van Hirtum HW, Bakker I, Hopman-Rock M, Hirasing RA, van Mechelen W: Validity and reproducibility of motion sensors in youth: a systematic update. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2009, 41:818-827.
• [12]Cardon G, Van Cauwenberghe E, De Bourdeaudhuij I: What do we know about physical activity in infants and toddlers: a review of the literature and future research directions. Science & Sports 2011, 26:127-130.
• [13]Gubbels JS, Kremers S, van Kann DHH, Stafleu A, Candel MJ, Dagnelie PC, Thijs C, de Vries NK: Interaction between physical environment, social environment, and child characteristics in determining physical activity at child. Health Psychol 2011, 30:84-90.
• [14]Manios Y: Design and descriptive results of the "Growth, Exercise and Nutrition Epidemiological Study In preSchoolers": The GENESIS Study. BMC Public Health 2006, 6:32. BioMed Central Full Text
• [15]Child & Family (Kind & Gezin)[http://www.kindengezin.be/Themas/Kinderopvang/default.jsp] webcite Childcare (Kinderopvang) [Dutch]
• [16]WHO Multicentre Growth Reference Study Group: WHO Child Growth Standards based on length/height, weight and age. Acta Paediatr 2006, 95:76-85.
• [17]Trost SG: Conducting accelerometer-based activity assessments in field-based research. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2005, 37:S531-S543.
• [18]Ward DS, Evenson KR, Vaughn A, Rodgers AB, Troiano RP: Accelerometer use in physical activity: best practices and research recommendations. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2005, 37:S582-S588.
• [19]Rowlands AV: Accelerometer assessment of physical activity in children: an update. Pediatr Exerc Sci 2007, 19:252-266.
• [20]Santech Inc: [http://www.meterplussoftware.com/] webciteMeterplus 4.2. [English]
• [21]Van Cauwenberghe E, Labarque V, Trost SG, De Bourdeaudhuij I, Cardon G: Calibration and Comparison of Accelerometer Cut Points in Preschool Children. Int J Pediatr Obes, in press.
• [22]Penpraze V, Reilly JJ, MacLean CM, Montgomery C, Kelly LA, Paton JY, Aitchison T, Grant S: Monitoring of physical activity in young children: How much is enough? Pediatr Exerc Sci 2006, 18:483-491.
• [23]Pate RR, Almeida MJ, McIver KL, Pfeiffer KA, Dowda M: Validation and calibration of an accelerometer in preschool children. Obesity 2006, 14:2000-2006.
• [24]Pfeiffer KA, Dowda M, McIver K, Pate RR: Factors related to objectively measured physical activity in preschool children. Pediatr Exerc Sci 2009, 21:196-208.
• [25]Sirard J, Trost S, Pfeiffer K, Dowda M, Pate RR: Calibration and evaluation of an objective measure of physical activity in preschool children. J Phys Act Health 2005, 3:345-357.
• [26]Brown WH, Pfeiffer KA, McIver KL, Dowda M, Almeida MJ, Pate RR: Assessing preschool children's physical activity: the Observational System for Recording Physical Activity in children-preschool version. Res Q Exerc Sport 2006, 77:167-176.
• [27]Brown WH, Pfeiffer KA, McIver KL, Dowda M, Almeida MJ, Pate RR: Observational System for Recording Physical Activity in Children-Preschool (OSRAC-P). OSRAC-P Training Manual for Observers. Columbia: University of South Carolina; 2009.
• [28]Van Puyenbroeck J, Maes B, Laeremans P: [http://ppw.kuleuven.be/ortho/vitessa] webciteVitessa 0.1. [Dutch]
• [29]Bland MJ, Altman DG: Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Stat Methods Med Res 1999, 8:135-160.
• [30]Jago R, Zakeri I, Baranowski T, Watson K: Decision boundaries and receiver operating characteristic curves: new methods for determining accelerometer cutpoints. J Sports Sci 2007, 25:937-944.
• [31]Metz CE: Basic principles of ROC analysis. Semin Nucl Med 1978, 8:283-298.
• [32]Verbestel V, Van Cauwenberghe E, De Coen V, Maes L, De Bourdeaudhuij I, Cardon G: Within- and between-day variability of objectively measured physical activity in preschoolers. Pediatr Exerc Sci, in press.
• [33]Beets MW, Bornstein D, Dowda M, Pate RR: Compliance With National Guidelines for Physical Activity in U.S. Preschoolers: Measurement and Interpretation. Pediatrics 2011, 127:658-664.
• [34]Grant PM: The validation of a novel activity monitor in the measurement of posture and motion during everyday activities. Br J Sports Med 2006, 40:992-997.
• [35]Oliver M, Schofield GM, Schluter PJ: Accelerometry to assess preschooler's free play: Issues with count threshold and epoch durations. Meas Phys Educ Exerc Sci 2009, 13:181-190.
• [36]Marshall SJ, Ramirez E: Reducing sedentary behavior: a new paradigm in physical activity promotion. Am J Lifestyle Med, in press.